G.R. No. 100294 December 21, 1992
BENITO A. TIATCO, petitioner, vs. THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION and THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Benito A. Tiatco, a career employee in the Department of Health (DOH), was holding the position of Hospital Administrative Officer III in a permanent capacity at the Central Luzon General Hospital, Pampanga. Pursuant to Executive Order No. 119, the DOH implemented a reorganization through Ministry Order No. 264-C, s. 1986, dated November 7, 1986. This reorganization resulted in Tiatco’s appointment to the lower position of Hospital Administrative Officer II at the Escolastica Romero District Hospital. He received a copy of the notice of reappointment on May 6, 1988. On May 27, 1988, a letter was written by Atty. Jose F.S. Bengzon, Jr. to the DOH, requesting it to look into whether there was ground to demote Tiatco. The DOH indorsed the matter for evaluation. Unable to get any action from the DOH, Tiatco filed an appeal directly to the Civil Service Commission (CSC) on October 31, 1989, more than a year after his reappointment, contending his demotion was without due process and that DOH guidelines did not provide for an appeal for demoted employees. The CSC dismissed his appeal in its resolution dated February 5, 1991, finding that he failed to file the prerequisite appeal to the appointing authority as required by the Rules on Government Reorganization and that the appeal was filed out of time. Tiatco countered that his appeal was filed within 21 days from May 6, 1988, through his counsel’s letter, which was within the 30-day reglementary period provided in the Implementing Guidelines of DOH Order No. 26, s. 1988.

ISSUE

Whether the Civil Service Commission correctly dismissed Benito A. Tiatco’s appeal for having been filed out of time and for failure to follow the proper procedure for appeals under the Rules on Government Reorganization.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the petition for lack of merit, upholding the CSC’s dismissal of Tiatco’s appeal. The Court ruled that the letter written by Atty. Bengzon to the DOH could not be considered a letter of protest or an appeal; it was merely an inquiry or an act of intercession. The Rules on Government Reorganization required an appeal to be filed first with the appointing authority within ten (10) days, and only thereafter, if unsatisfied, a further appeal to the CSC within another ten (10) days. Tiatco filed his appeal directly with the CSC over a year after his reappointment, thereby failing to comply with the prescribed procedure and reglementary periods. The right to appeal is a statutory right that must be exercised in accordance with the law; failure to do so results in the loss of that right. The considerable delay of one year and five months in asserting his right was strongly persuasive of a lack of merit in his claim. The Court found no error in the CSC’s judgment and accorded finality to its findings, which were supported by substantial evidence.